Use of percutaneous imaging-guided biopsy for Liver Imaging and Reporting Data System (LI-RADS) observations: A retrospective study from two liver transplant centers.

Since the adoption of guidelines for the non-invasive imaging diagnosis of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), the need for sampling of a lesion in cirrhosis has decreased. We aimed to retrospectively investigate the use of percutaneous imaging-guided biopsy for LI-RADS observations in cirrhosis in two large liver transplant centers. A review of the pathology database in the two Institutions (Institution A, Institution B) was conducted to identify patients that underwent percutaneous imaging-guided biopsy for a liver lesion in the interval time 01/01/2015-12/312020. Liver observations on pre-procedure contrast-enhanced CT or MRI were classified according to LI-RADS v2018. Among the 728 patients who underwent imaging guided biopsy of a liver lesion in Institution A, and among the 749 patients who underwent imaging guided biopsy of a liver lesion in Institution B, respectively 50 (6.8 %) and 16 (2.1 %) were cirrhotic with available pre-procedural contrast-enhanced CT or MRI. A total of 67 lesions were biopsied. 30/67 (45 %) biopsied observations were classified as LR-M. 55/67 (82 %) biopsies were positive for malignancy at histopathology and among them 33 (60 %) were HCC. In conclusion, a small percentage of percutaneous, imaging-guided biopsies for liver lesions are performed in cirrhosis, and more frequently for LR-M observations.

A Multicenter Assessment of Interreader Reliability of LI-RADS Version 2018 for MRI and CT.

Background Various limitations have impacted research evaluating reader agreement for Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System (LI-RADS). Purpose To assess reader agreement of LI-RADS in an international multicenter multireader setting using scrollable images. Materials and Methods This retrospective study used deidentified clinical multiphase CT and MRI and reports with at least one untreated observation from six institutions and three countries; only qualifying examinations were submitted. Examination dates were October 2017 to August 2018 at the coordinating center. One untreated observation per examination was randomly selected using observation identifiers, and its clinically assigned features were extracted from the report. The corresponding LI-RADS version 2018 category was computed as a rescored clinical read. Each examination was randomly assigned to two of 43 research readers who independently scored the observation. Agreement for an ordinal modified four-category LI-RADS scale (LR-1, definitely benign; LR-2, probably benign; LR-3, intermediate probability of malignancy; LR-4, probably hepatocellular carcinoma [HCC]; LR-5, definitely HCC; LR-M, probably malignant but not HCC specific; and LR-TIV, tumor in vein) was computed using intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs). Agreement was also computed for dichotomized malignancy (LR-4, LR-5, LR-M, and LR-TIV), LR-5, and LR-M. Agreement was compared between research-versus-research reads and research-versus-clinical reads. Results The study population consisted of 484 patients (mean age, 62 years ± 10 [SD]; 156 women; 93 CT examinations, 391 MRI examinations). ICCs for ordinal LI-RADS, dichotomized malignancy, LR-5, and LR-M were 0.68 (95% CI: 0.61, 0.73), 0.63 (95% CI: 0.55, 0.70), 0.58 (95% CI: 0.50, 0.66), and 0.46 (95% CI: 0.31, 0.61) respectively. Research-versus-research reader agreement was higher than research-versus-clinical agreement for modified four-category LI-RADS (ICC, 0.68 vs 0.62, respectively; P = .03) and for dichotomized malignancy (ICC, 0.63 vs 0.53, respectively; P = .005), but not for LR-5 (P = .14) or LR-M (P = .94). Conclusion There was moderate agreement for LI-RADS version 2018 overall. For some comparisons, research-versus-research reader agreement was higher than research-versus-clinical reader agreement, indicating differences between the clinical and research environments that warrant further study. © RSNA, 2023 Supplemental material is available for this article. See also the editorials by Johnson and Galgano and Smith in this issue.

Update on MR Contrast Agents for Liver Imaging: What to Use and When.

Contrast-enhanced liver MR imaging is an important diagnostic tool for many different liver diseases with the sensitivity and specificity in diagnosing liver diseases typically far exceeding other imaging modalities. The safety profile of GBCA is excellent with minimal adverse events. Both extracellular and hepatobiliary contrast agents offer unique advantages and potential limitations. ECA is excellent for obtaining high-quality arterial phase imaging and can be particularly useful for the evaluation of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in cirrhotic patients. In contrast, hepatobiliary agent (HBA) can help distinguish FNH from adenomas, detect liver metastases, and provide biliary imaging due to their uptake within normal hepatocytes and biliary excretion.

Imaging of chronic male pelvic pain: what the abdominal imager should know.

Chronic pelvic pain is an important but underrecognized cause of morbidity in men. While there is abundant literature discussing female pelvic pain and the diagnostic role of imaging, much less attention has been given to imaging of non-gynecologic causes of chronic pelvic pain. Chronic pelvic pain in men can be a challenge to diagnose as pain may arise from visceral, musculoskeletal, or neurovascular pathology. Imaging of the pelvic viscera has been covered in detail elsewhere in this edition and therefore will not be reviewed here. We will focus upon topics less familiar to the abdominal radiologist, including imaging of pelvic floor, musculoskeletal, and neurovascular pathology.

Ultrasonographic Nonalcoholic Fatty Pancreas Is Associated with Advanced Fibrosis in NAFLD: A Retrospective Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Nonalcoholic fatty pancreas disease (NAF-P) is strongly linked with nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD), but its relationship with advanced liver disease is unknown. AIMS: This study investigated the association between NAF-P and both advanced fibrosis and nonalcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH). METHODS: This retrospective study evaluated adults with biopsy-proven NAFLD with a sonogram within 1 year of liver biopsy. NAF-P was diagnosed by comparing the echogenicity of the pancreas to the kidney and was graded by severity. The primary outcome was the effect of NAF-P on the presence of advanced fibrosis and NASH, while secondary outcomes included the association of extensive NAF-P (grade II/III). Propensity score matching for independent risk factors of advanced fibrosis (age, gender, body mass index, and diabetes) was performed. RESULTS: One hundred and four patients were included in the study and 91 (87.5%) had NAF-P. After propensity score matching, NAF-P was significantly associated with advanced fibrosis (OR 10.52, p < 0.001) but not NASH (p = 0.27). Extensive NAF-P was predictive of advanced fibrosis (OR 3.35, p = 0.006) and NASH (OR 5.37, p < 0.001). NAF-P had a negative predictive value (NPV) of 93% for advanced fibrosis. When matching for the NAFLD fibrosis score in addition to the variables above, both NAF-P (OR 5.36, p = 0.001) and extensive NAF-P (OR 5.38, p = 0.002) still significantly predicted advanced fibrosis. CONCLUSION: NAF-P is predictive of advanced fibrosis, even when controlling for independent predictors of advanced fibrosis and the NAFLD fibrosis score. NAF-P has an excellent NPV and is a safe, inexpensive finding that can rule out advanced fibrosis.